Strong sales of phones running Google Android throughout 2010 have managed to push the mobile platform past Apple's iPhone in total active subscribers for the first time, according to comScore.

The research firm released its latest figures this week, revealing that Android was the second-largest mobile platform in November of 2010. Google jumped past Apple even though the iPhone did not lose any share of the market, percentage wise.

Android continued its fast growth, taking another 6.4 points from its previous total in September to give it 26 percent of the U.S. market of smartphone subscribers. Android now only trails Research in Motion, which lost 4.1 points to hold 33.5 percent of the market.

Apple and the iPhone came in third, representing 25 percent of the total domestic market. The Cupertino, Calif., company gained 0.8 points from its share in September.

Of course, Apple's smartphone presence consists solely of the iPhone, while handsets running Google Android are represented by a number of manufacturers and many more devices.

Behind Apple was Microsoft, which slipped from 10.8 percent in September to 9 percent in November. Microsoft's new mobile platform, Windows Phone 7, launched in November.

In all, comScore found that there were 234 million Americans ages 13 and over using mobile devices, with just 61.5 million of those being smartphone owners. But the smartphone market continues to grow, increasing in size by 10 percent in November, versus the previous survey from September.

Quarterly sales of Android phones were first reported to have passed the iPhone in May of 2010. The new data from comScore represents devices actively being used, rather than current sales figures.

when would AI get it .. Android is not a phone ! ... Iphone is a phone . let me know when M Droid outsells Iphone 4

I'm interested too. It's long time not only about phones, but operating systems too, so iOs vs Android and phones vs phones and since no manufacturer comes close to Apple in numbers i don't see how you can slap all numbers together.

More rationalization on how phones running Android vs iPhones is not a valid comparison? We need to include non phone devices like iPads and iPods, or we should count all iPhones as iPhones, but treat the different Android devices separately?

Samsung sold over 10 million of just the Galaxy S alone in 7 months. That's just one vendor. Considering how many Android choices there are (both in terms of handsets, and carriers), it would be news if Android totals didn't beat iPhone.

More rationalization on how phones running Android vs iPhones is not a valid comparison? We need to include non phone devices like iPads and iPods, or we should count all iPhones as iPhones, but treat the different Android devices separately?

Im curious to know why you think its valid to compare a single device to an operating system. I find it hard that anyone on this forum is unable to understand the logistical differences between a free OS licensed to any manufacture and one that only comes with the HW from one manufacture.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

All it means is that the ios platform is not the most popular amongst smartphone owners. Apple's client base has always been a niche market until the iphone came along and then they made billions. Now they can go back to making a high end niche product and earn record profits from loyalists. I think it's a winning formula.

On Galaxy S, Samsung also has a winning formula and it's a win-win in a growing market.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bsenka

Samsung sold over 10 million of just the Galaxy S alone in 7 months. That's just one vendor. Considering how many Android choices there are (both in terms of handsets, and carriers), it would be news if Android totals didn't beat iPhone.

More rationalization on how phones running Android vs iPhones is not a valid comparison? We need to include non phone devices like iPads and iPods, or we should count all iPhones as iPhones, but treat the different Android devices separately?

You really need to get over your DIlger fixation and find something healthy to obsess about, like stamps. Or butterflies.

Not one word about non-phone iOS devices was mentioned in this article. Are you so obtuse you cannot read an article without reading into it your obsessions? How does this commetary feed the discussion here with anything factual or relevant?

If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one

Samsung sold over 10 million of just the Galaxy S alone in 7 months. That's just one vendor. Considering how many Android choices there are (both in terms of handsets, and carriers), it would be news if Android totals didn't beat iPhone.

Precisely. It WOULD be news if all Android-based phones put together, didn't beat sales of iPhone.

Of course, I doubt anyone would want to compare iOS based devises to Android based devices in a head to head operating system battle royale.

these are very important figures, not only for profitability but also for adoption of the platform.
Ideally these would also include other devices that run on the OS'es (and specified with the capabilities of the devices that the OS can tap into)

i found myself doubting whether to buy an iPhone or an Android Phone just because of what apps would be available in the future. Unarguably IOS , like Android, has already a critical mass... but when it comes to platforms, chance is that one platform will be abandoned over time or will be ignored for certain applications.

Lets remind the early days of MAC OS vs Windows, the Mac almost dissapeared in '97. Why could it again lead to this??? Well, just like in the 80's, Android is freely available for other manufacturers to implement it in their devices, while iOS is not. widespread of the Android system in current applications and new ones (like seen in cars on CES) could lead to an Android platform that is many times more wide spread than the iOS platform. That's why developers would be more likely to pass up on the iOS platform than the Android platform.

now this is pessimistically off course, and i assume Apple has learned its lesson; but still this lingers in my mind...

iPhone is actually 4 different phones. iOS is actually 9 different devices.

if were going to count a model number differences that determine capacity, the only difference in these device, then youll have your work cut for you counting every slight HW difference in Android-based device in the world.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

This has been the story all along. Android was the late comer to the party. Now the reverse is true, to the surprise of many. I think Apple might consider "one size fits all" may not carry them through or that depriving one carrier to earn a bigger kick back from another may not be viable long term.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mac.World

Precisely. It WOULD be news if all Android-based phones put together, didn't beat sales of iPhone.

All it means is that the ios platform is not the most popular amongst smartphone owners. Apple's client base has always been a niche market until the iphone came along and then they made billions. Now they can go back to making a high end niche product and earn record profits from loyalists. I think it's a winning formula.

On Galaxy S, Samsung also has a winning formula and it's a win-win in a growing market.

Actually what this means - if you read the numbers in context is that Android is actually growing the smart phone market segment out of the feature phone market segment - which is a good thing for everyone. The more people who start using smart phones opens up the market for all device makers - including Apple, RIM, Nokia, and Microsoft, along with the 'Droid makers and Google.

Let's be very clear here Apple own 27% of the consumer market for PCs in the US. That is hardly a niche. And Apple is growing their market share at a much higher rate year over year against a continuingly flat PC sales sales slope. Apple wasn't a niche player for very long in the MP3 player market, and well before the iPhone was introduced it was the most popular player in the market - and still is. The whole "high-end niche product" meme is woefully over-played and highly inaccurate by any comparison. You may want to find another strawman to flog with that.

If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one

Yes, the numbers are certainly there for Android, but if you were to really have all the data that showed how many of those phones were buy 1, get 1 it would sure make some interesting information when you consider that there are no such deals for the iPhone. I think that much of the data is inflated by bargain hunters.

For those that go for the more expensive models, there is still a lot of disappointment. I have a Droid X on Verizon - only because I have no ATT coverage in my area. It sucks like a nun with braces. As soon as the iPhone is available, my Droid is going to the recycling depot.

Bottom line though... Apple doesn't have to be the biggest at what it does, it just has to be the best. Those that want quality will line up for it, not just buy it because it was on sale.

MS still holding onto about 10%. I think WP7 will be more successful than many think. Id certainly choose it today over Android.

Isnt that 6.4% rise a dramatic slowdown over what it was doing? Id have thought theyd be rising faster with so many devices coming to market for the holidays.

There is still an effective Windows phone presence there - and we have not yet seen how M/soft is going to deal with Android eroding their share. They already have two handset makers under their guns between the Motorola lawsuit and the licensing under threat of lawsuit of the other (can't remember which one offhand). They haven't begun to claw back their marketshare, and with the considerable clout they can still pack - I definitely wouldn't count Redmond out yet.

If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one

Lets remind the early days of MAC OS vs Windows, the Mac almost dissapeared in '97. Why could it again lead to this??? Well, just like in the 80's, Android is freely available for other manufacturers to implement it in their devices, while iOS is not.

But the mac in the 80's never had an installed base of millions of devices as it has now. It was at the time a very very small company, that could not compete against the monopoly of IBM as rammed in by MS (lead by Gates). The situation is very very different now. I don't understand why people fail to see the differences, and just keep parroting the "similarities" without any thought. The field is level, a multibillion company vs a multibillion company, each one with its own strengths and weaknesses. I don't see how this is the 80's "all over again"!

But the mac in the 80's never had an installed base of millions of devices as it has now. It was at the time a very very small company, that could not compete against the monopoly of IBM as rammed in by MS (lead by Gates). The situation is very very different now. I don't understand why people fail to see the differences, and just keep parroting the "similarities" without any thought. The field is level, a multibillion company vs a multibillion company, each one with its own strengths and weaknesses. I don't see how this is the 80's "all over again"!

All the free contract phones combined have finally managed to surpass the more expensive iPhone. Multiple manufacturers with multiple configurations and buy one get one free and free upgrade handsets have finally managed to catch up to a company who has only been in the Market for four years. Apple must be shaking in their boots.

In other news sales of Aston martin have been surpassed by fiat. Funny thing is that Aston martin's profit margin appears to be higher...

Ps. If we are talking os, do these figures include all iOS installs including iPad iPod touch and iPhone?

Irrespective, Market share does not equal success, quality or profitability. Popular is not defined by the number of products given away or cheaply available, massive Market share normally means an affordable or compromise product. The popular choice is what you aspire to own.

Sine when have apple equated success with Market share, and since when does larger Market share reflect succes, quality or user experience?

But the mac in the 80's never had an installed base of millions of devices as it has now. It was at the time a very very small company, that could not compete against the monopoly of IBM as rammed in by MS (lead by Gates). The situation is very very different now. I don't understand why people fail to see the differences, and just keep parroting the "similarities" without any thought. The field is level, a multibillion company vs a multibillion company, each one with its own strengths and weaknesses. I don't see how this is the 80's "all over again"!

Right, and MS didn't take off with a monopoly until 1995. Apple had the advantage with its OS the whole time and due to their incompetence and mistakes let MS take over.

All the free contract phones combined have finally managed to surpass iPhone. Multiple manufacturers with multiple configurations and buy one get one free and free upgrade handsets have finally managed to catch up to a company who has only been in he Market for four years. Apple must be shaking in their boots.

In other news sales of Aston martin have been surpassed by fiat. Funny thing is that Aston martin's profits appear to be higher...

Aston martin does not rely on an ecosystem specifically around it...
An AM tanks premium petrol like most other cars and drives the same roads
so not a perfect analogy

This question would be valid except that when Android became available on ATT, the target smartphone demographic had already left ATT or bought an iphone, most becoming happy owners. Many iphone owners will move to Verizon and many upgraders on Verizon will choose an iPhone. My point, however, is that we will not see a reversal in the trend over the next six months.

My prediction is that Android will maintain faster quarterly growth... not for reasons of user interface, but due to lower cost (Sprint, Tmobile) and choices in form factor and unique features.

Both platforms will grow as the market grows and also with the demise of Blackberry and Symbian. However, in a year or two, I see Apple settling in with its minority market share earning high margins, as it does so well, making high quality products. Nothing wrong with this. I've owned macs for many years.

Quote:

Originally Posted by solipsism

Is Android selling as well on AT&T as on the other US carriers? If it is then I think we can assume your statement is correct. If not, I think its likely youre wrong.

My verizon friend just bought a Droid X due to her old phone finally burning out. They practically gave away the DroidX phone. She didn't have to pay anything for it except just an extra $10/mo for the plan. That kind of gives me an idea about what they're doing.

She was actually waiting for an iPhone and knows about the impending arrival. She just could not wait any more. What a pity as the first thing she mentioned about her DroidX is how complicated it is to use. She has an iPod touch and loved its simplicity.

How can one compete when shops are practically giving the phones away?

iPhone is actually 4 different phones. iOS is actually 9 different devices.

Oh snap! Aren't you cleverer. Actually, it is two iPhone form factors (supported - 1st gen iPhone while still viable compared to many of the venerable 1.5 and 1.6 android phones, is not supported anymore), but hey while we're being arrantly silly let's dive into that marvelous and majical place called Android heaven for a similarly idiotic comparison:
There are currently 8 OS versions of Android of which 6 are currently supported
There are 28 handset makers making smartphones with the Android OS installed
There are currently in production 119 different handsets (including carrier-branded versions due to carrier differentiation of the install)
There are currently slated an additional 21 handsets to be produced with the Android OS installed

but hey let's take this out to the boundaries of credulity: Android owns more than just smartphones!

There are 6 different e-readers with Android installed
There are 3 netbook models with Android installed
There are at least 2 media/mp3 player devices with Android installed
And of course the Google TV
Slated for future release are at least 2 "smart" TVs running Android
And look for Android to become part of your automobile operating systems (ala Sync)

Android OWNS devices, regardless of class, manufacturer, or intended use - like sugar and salt in processed foods and like Windows wishes to be: Android is Everywhere.

Now I hope this makes you feel better about yourself, and let's you relax that white-knuckled grip you have on your Android fandom.

If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one

Who cares about the figures, I have loved each and every one of my iPhones, and have no intention of swapping to another handset. Same reason why we only have Macs in our home, very reliable, they do exactly what you need and very stylish to boot

This is a direct result of Apple’s love affair with AT&T. I understand AT&T took a risk when no one else did, but by the time the iPhone 3Gs came around, Apple should have offered it to any and all carriers that wanted it.

By that time, the iPhone was an established hit, and I am sure carriers would be willing to work with Apple to get the phone on their networks. Oh and one cannot say the “quality” of AT&T network is what kept them on it. Because around this time there were floods of complaints on the internet about dropped calls, slow data, etc… Steve was even asked about this on occasion.

Apple should have even made a CDMA version. Steve should have come on stage and said, here is the iPhone 3Gs, available on ALL networks! Why limit your customer base to just ONE carrier?

Sure this would not have stopped Android, but it would have slowed it down significantly. Even now, with all the Verizon rumors going around, why are they just limiting themselves to Verizon?!?!? In EVERY other country in the world, the iPhone is available to more than one carrier. So why does Apple continue to have this love affair with AT&T?!?!?!?

They don’t have to license iOS to others. They first have to make sure that everyone that wants an iPhone can get one. I for one flat out refuse to pay AT&T inflated prices. T-Mobile is much more economical for me, and the coverage is just as good at ATT in my area. Some people love Verizon, others Sprint, still others some other carrier, why should they be denied the phone?